IF YOU DO NOT LOVE IT THEN PERHAPS IT WOULD BE IN YOUR BEST INTERESTS TO LEAVE IT POST-HASTE!!!!1













Seriously, it's ridiculous to state, or even imply, that someone should "get the hell out!" if they don't want to regurgitate something like the Pledge of Allegience, of which the addition of the phrase "under God" was a knee-jerk, anti-Commie BS routine.

Is it anti-American to support cold-war politicking rather than thinking through the topic, and coming to an informed decision?

The beauty of the USA lies in exactly the antithesis of the "love it or leave it, cheesedick" mentality - it would be more accurate to say "love it or improve it through protesting, grassroots political efforts, and the laws of the land"

I could really give a shit if someone wants to say the pledge or not - its their right not to say it, but don't take it away from everyone else simply because you don't believe in God, or A God or Allah or any other higher being.

Frankly I don't think it should be a part of a daily school procession but oh well. I mean where I grew up we only said it on Monday mornings - and even then we still had people not say it. I had a friend who was Muslim who didn't recite it but still stood up for the flag. That doesn't bother me and it shouldn't bother anyone else. So fine, don't say it, but why the hell do you want to change that? I'm sure we could find something much more worthwhile to change - ie: impending war with Iraq, Affirmative Action, Pro Life/Pro Choice......the list goes on and on

I totally agree with Mere....you don't want to say "under God," don't. You don't want to say the pledge, don't. But it is a part of our country, which we are part of, and to take it away and make it against the rules to SAY it, is bullshit.

like I said - that means new everything.....new Declaration of Independence Constitution, $. everything....

I don't want the whole Pledge banished, just the phrase "under God." It wasn't in there when it was first written, and it doesn't belong there now.

what do you mean it wasnt there?
anyway, the last thing i want to do is sound religious but this nation was founded on biblical principles like it or not. the founding fathers were faith believers and gave the founding of this country to God. to them it was because of God that this nation exists. the pledge of alligience is a statement that gives respect to the founding fathers. without them america would probably cease to exist. they gave credit and honor to God for the blessing of america. you do not have to be Christian, Jewish, etc. , but why cant you show some respect. yes this is your country, but you didnt make it. how would you like to have put your heart and soul into something and no one cared that you did it? even if you dont believe in God, show some respect to the fore fathers. good Lord, its just two simple words, 'under God'. saying it DOESNT MAKE YOU RELIGIOUS!!!!!!! if you dont like it, dont say the pledge. go sing the 'star spangled banner' or 'america the beautiful' or go put a usa flag sticker on your car. there are plenty of other ways to show your american spirit without giving reference to God.

just my 2 cents

As noted above, the words "under God" were added to the pledge in the mid 1950's.

yes "under God" was added later - perhaps as a KSig RC said, a knee jerk anti-commie thing....but that doesn't change the fact that as smilely21 said, this country was founded by men who believed in God - E plurbis Unim? yes so like I said, we can't pick and choose what we want to change when it comes to stuff like that, you change one thing then you have to change it all

Gosh I would hate to offend anyone - I hate it that people think just because they don't believe it then no one else should. Just as ignorant as it is to have "under God" in a country with non God believing people it is almost more ignorant to try and take it away from people that DO believe

:rolleyes:

In homeroom period in junior high school, our teacher had us recite the Pledge of Allegiance every morning. Each day a student would lead the Pledge - bascially, the teacher just went down the row. There were two students who told the teacher that they did not wish to say the pledge, nor did they wish to lead when it came to their turn. I don't know about the first girl, but the other student was a girl who sat right next to me - she is a Jehovah's Witness. As I recall, the two girls wouldn't recite, but they did stand up. Our teacher had no problem with that at all and simply skipped over them. None of the students made fun of them. It wasn't an issue; saying the Pledge was voluntary.

.....Kelly :)

oh ok. but i still stick with my previous statement.


just a side note ...maybe 'under God' should be taken out cause right now this country sure as heck isnt.

I mean exactly that - it didn't exist. The phrase "under God" wasn't added to the pledge until 1954 when a Roman Catholic organization urged the government to make the change.


When did I ever show disrespect to the forefathers? The only group I can think of that I may have disrespected is the Knights of Columbus, but aren't they in fact disrespecting non-believers and people of different religions by insisting that their God is mentioned in the Pledge? If one deity is mentioned, then all should be mentioned. This doesn't work either because there are people who don't believe in a supreme being. Therefore, in order to accomodate everyone ("one Nation"), the phrase should be removed from the Pledge. To achieve equality and give everyone the opportunity to say the pledge, we must cater to the lowest common denominator, which in this case is the group of non-believers.

Were the citizens being disrespectful pre-1954 before "under God" was added? And if that phrase is comprised of "just two simple words," what is the harm in removing them altogether? If it is so easy for a non-believer to utter them, then it is surely as easy for a believer to NOT utter them. After all, they are "just two simple words."

This is not about respect for the forefathers. It is about separation of church and state. I am sure if this passes, it will open up a whole can of worms, but so what? Is it wrong to think and reassess? Is change that bad?

i said i didnt want to sound religious but whatever i am just going to say it.........personal opinion...dont slam me

i think that separation of church and state started a domino effect of the chaos and destruction that has gone on in this country.


BTW.... when it comes to GC the subject of race and religion need to stay out. there are way too many opinions to discuss, it is impossible for things not to get ugly....both subjects quite frankly piss me off:mad: :mad: :mad:

"Out of many, One"

Dude, I think that disproves your point, rather than the converse . . .

By the way - not all of the founders were the good ol' Christian boys you make them out to be - many, like Franklin et al, were Deists, more in line with the philosophy of the time . . . so don't act like "In God We Trust" gives the government carte blanche to make our country a religious entity, as it's quite obvious this sort of statement on currency doesn't hold any effect on implementation of institutional things like saying the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ever wonder why we're allowed to amend the constitution?

It's because the founders expected change to be necessary in more "enlightened" times . . . I'd like to think we're more enlightened than applying a single religious aspect to somewhere where IT DOESN'T BELONG, ie public school, when it directly violates everything the nation was actually founded on (and no, a religion wasn't one of those things - more likely FREEDOM of religion than application of a single religion).

-RC
PS - why would this get ugly?

But in a system supposedly founded on the notion of equality, you must give everyone an equal opportunity to recite the pledge, seeing how it is a legitimate part of our country. By inserting <deity of your choice>, you are automatically excluding X% of the population. By keeping it generic, everyone has a chance to participate without having their beliefs infringed upon.

* Please note that I am using "you" in the generic sense.

------------------------------

Having gone so far down this road, I hope everyone realizes that it is not my intent to offend anyone.

Also, as previously mentioned in this thread, removing "under God" from the Pledge could start a costly chain reaction. What of the national currency? I can't imagine how much it will cost to replace all of the money in circulation. I also must admit that I am somewhat hypocritical because I gladly accept my paychecks each month without a second thought. I really haven't given the consequences of these actions much thought, so I am not prepared to discuss them.

I'm honestly too tired right now to get into a debate about the Constitution and the law and what not (and it's probably best that I not get started anyway).

However, on a purely personal level, I do not believe in God, and I have a problem with children in PUBLIC schools either being forced to say the pledge or being made to feel like outsiders by not saying it. I know how kids are -- if a child did not stand to recite the pledge when everyone else in the class did, I'm sure there would be ramifications. Children should not be made to feel like outsiders in a public school because they don't say "under God." And MereMere, I have no problem with anyone else believing in God.

Also, just because the "God" referred to may or may not be a Christian God does NOT mean that it is inclusive of all religions. There are plenty of religions that do not include belief in a God, and there are also those who have no religious beliefs. A public school should be a place where they ALL are comfortable.